The solutions begin with society accepting that a problem, in fact, exists.

I mean, are we to assume with all the scientists and generals and historians in the world, there is NO person or group of people who understands the situation enough to exploit it for positive change? Or, much more likely, are we simply not looking for these people, asking their opinion, and putting it all over mainstream TV so people can hear it.

I've learned a hundred times more about the Middle East's history and culture from YouTube, than I have from any MSM TV show or article combined. YouTube interviews with actual Islam and Middle East experts and Muslim reformists. When was the last time you saw a serious interview written by an Ex-Muslim? (Because "ex" means there's something wrong with it, BAN THEM!)

There are people who are trying to reform Islam, the same way Christians reformed AT LEAST TWICE in the last 500+ years. The PROBLEM is that because of this head-in-the-sand mentality, the MSM et al are pumping into people's heads that "Islam doesn't need reformed." There are active, huge organizations, that are pushing AGAINST the natural people's will to reform. There are tons of good Muslims with modern values that the MSM, and huge political organizations allied with feminists, go out of their way to crush.

Would Christianity have reformed if there were multi-billion dollar movements trying to keep it the same and helping to ostracize any reformers? Hell, can ANY fledgling group survive such an onslaught?

-----sig:“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs

I doubt it. Gifts are not the same thing as payments for a provided product/service, the meaning of the words as they were written and intended seems pretty clear and straightforward. Without any strong evidence or proof of special favors being traded for foreign officials using Trump businesses, I don't see this going anywhere. It would be a Democrat's wet dream to be able to come up with a twisted interpretation of a law to end Trump's presidency. At most, the law may just be updated to clarify that the foreign officials will not be allowed to use businesses owned by the president to prevent even the appearance of quid pro quo. More likely than that, Trump may stop allowing them to use his businesses, or maybe even allow foreign officials in general to use his hotel free of charge while conducting matters with the US.

For the sake of argument, could you please define the problem in no uncertain terms?

>99.99% of all terrorist attacks are all done by a single... unmentionable religion. Like some sort of Voldemort. "If you mention them, you'll give them power!"

There are no Amish terrorists. There haven't been but a handful of Christian ones in the last hundred years. There are no Buddhist and Hindu suicide bombers to best of my recollection. Why? Why do people gravitate toward this specific religion, or, does this specific religion encourage terrorism? Do people really think Hindu people don't have historical reasons for hating Capitalism and Western Culture? The same supposed "evil white men and their money" justifications for ISIS? Surely, one look through a history book on India should show you a huge hatred for western values and yet... here they are... fighting alongside us against terrorism.

Those are men with conservative orthodox, strict religious values. Just like "That Other Religion(TM)" And yet, these guys are still able to fight for our values and save American lives. Even if they don't agree personally with aspects of our culture, they're still willing to die to protect them. When was the last time you saw a Sikh shoot up a nightclub?

And I'd be saying every single one of these things if I was a practicing Muslim. It's not about crushing innocent people with words. It's about us, as a society, accepting the fact that in our current time, the majority (almost to the point of "entirety") of religious terrorist attacks are coming from one place. Just like how Christianity used to be involved in the same kinds of evil acts, and, at that time it was right to criticism them.

There are Muslim reformists who are trying to get everyone to listen... and the very ex-Muslims (and active Muslim reformists) who are trying to tell us in bold print "THERE IS A PROBLEM." society is ignoring them.

And furthermore, if Scientologists were blowing up people, we wouldn't stop anyone from criticizing them. We wouldn't say "The only people who can talk about the flaws of Scientology are Scientologists. Everyone else is a racists/bigot." We wouldn't devalue their criticisms the way we do with this Shall-Not-Be-Named religion.

Remember Bill Maher? The guy who in the 90's was FAR LEFTER than even the Democrats and openly said "I smoke pot and it should be legal. And so should gay marriage." Long before anyone ever thought gay marriage would ever be a thing. He was the guy who was "so far left" it was fun to laugh AT HIM when I was growing up. He was this cool guy but he was so forward thinking that people said, "Yeah that makes sense but the world will never be as progressive as you. You're way to hopeful."

This same guy, who used to be considered a left-wing hero, has been pounding his fist on the table for years talking about the dangers of political correctness and Isl::cough::--sorry I almost finished that sentence. I don't want my children's school bus blown up... by whoever those people may or may not be...

In the worlds of Bill Maher: Not all religions are equal. Religions are a set of ideas and we should be able to criticize the bad ideas.

-----sig:“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs

And furthermore, if Scientologists were blowing up people, we wouldn't stop anyone from criticizing them. We wouldn't say "The only people who can talk about the flaws of Scientology are Scientologists. Everyone else is a racists/bigot." We wouldn't devalue their criticisms the way we do with this Shall-Not-Be-Named religion.

Do I need to mention the IRA? The whole Protestant / Catholic war in Belfast and Ireland?

Do I need to mention the IRA? The whole Protestant / Catholic war in Belfast and Ireland?

Funny, I probably speak out against Roman Catholicism more than any other religion. I was just considering buying and wearing an upside down cross to show my dislike of their religion. So many they put to death in horrible ways.

I could almost really like Muslims if it wasn't for the "kill everyone that isn't a Muslim" clause in their Quran.

Qur’an:9:5 - “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

Qur’an:9:29 “Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission.”

Qur’an:8:39 “Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah.”

Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

Ishaq:587 “Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace.”

Qur’an:8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”

Qur’an:9:123 “Fight the unbelievers around you, and let them find harshness in you.”

Ishaq:578 “Crushing the heads of the infidels and splitting their skulls with sharp swords, we continually thrust and cut at the enemy. Blood gushed from their deep wounds as the battle wore them down. We conquered bearing the Prophet’s fluttering war banner. Our cavalry was submerged in rising dust, and our spears quivered, but by us the Prophet gained victory.”

There haven't been but a handful of Christian ones in the last hundred years..

This seems to me to be a rather ignorant statement, unless you're not counting things done by the KKK, Nazis, anti-abortion activists, anti-muslim extremists, or any of their derivatives for some reason.

I don't disagree at all with your general sentiment that there is nothing that cannot be commented on, but the surrounding vitriol feels like you're feeding off the same holy war narrative as Muslim terrorists. I could be wrong, of course, that's just how you're coming across.

First of all, there are no great religions. They're all stupid and dangerous.

That applies equally to all religions, Christianity (in all of its forms) included. To not comprehend this misses the point entirely, and ensures a lack of success in trying to persuade Muslims to escape from the trap they've been caught in. You come off in this thread as if you're still in your trap and just preaching atop your own high horse. I personally found that somewhat surprising because I thought you were an atheist or at least agnostic.

Append:

Also, considering how "Christian" the USA is it doesn't take a great stretch to blame the crimes of the USA on Christianity. It certainly is not an uncommon theme to hear references to the Christian god while making a speech against terrorism or in favor of war, etc. It always gets a lot of cheering too. It's sickening.

Pointing out the that Christianity is ultimately as dangerous is not defending Islam. In fact, in no uncertain terms I said all religions, not just Christianity. Of course, if ones tries they can find pretty incriminating passages in the Bible as well.

bamccaig, that's not Christ speaking. It's a man in a parable. If you're going to quote the Bible for inconsistencies / fallacies / whatever, maybe you should at least read what you're citing first. :/

11 As they were listening to this, he went on to tell a parable, because he was near Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. 12 So he said, “A nobleman went to a distant country to get royal power for himself and then return. 13 He summoned ten of his slaves, and gave them ten pounds,[a] and said to them, ‘Do business with these until I come back.’ 14 But the citizens of his country hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to rule over us.’ 15 When he returned, having received royal power, he ordered these slaves, to whom he had given the money, to be summoned so that he might find out what they had gained by trading. 16 The first came forward and said, ‘Lord, your pound has made ten more pounds.’ 17 He said to him, ‘Well done, good slave! Because you have been trustworthy in a very small thing, take charge of ten cities.’ 18 Then the second came, saying, ‘Lord, your pound has made five pounds.’ 19 He said to him, ‘And you, rule over five cities.’ 20 Then the other came, saying, ‘Lord, here is your pound. I wrapped it up in a piece of cloth, 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a harsh man; you take what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 He said to him, ‘I will judge you by your own words, you wicked slave! You knew, did you, that I was a harsh man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money into the bank? Then when I returned, I could have collected it with interest.’ 24 He said to the bystanders, ‘Take the pound from him and give it to the one who has ten pounds.’ 25 (And they said to him, ‘Lord, he has ten pounds!’) 26 ‘I tell you, to all those who have, more will be given; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and slaughter them in my presence.’”

The parables have to do with the Kingdom of God, and what He'll do when He returns. God has given everyone talents and he'll reward the people who use them while he's 'away', like the noble man in the story. But to the lazy, and the sloth, and the no-good will get no reward. Even what they have will be taken away from them, because they were disobedient, and ungrateful.

As to the implications of a ruler executing people who don't want to be ruled by him, that's a bit harsh. The parallel is the people who don't want to be ruled by God ie. the lawless. He has the right to get rid of them. They have no place in a righteous kingdom of peace.

If you knew anything about the Bible, you'd know there is the Lord's Day, 1000 years of peace and teaching before the Lake of Fire comes. Satan is locked away, and people are told the truth about God. Those that still refuse Him end up going into the lake of fire with Satan. There is also the first resurrection, which refers to those who make it into Heaven when they die. Those that don't await the second resurrection. Everyone gets a second chance.

Arguing with "bamccaig" is pointless. The best he can say against the Bible is to quote a parable. If he doesn't know what a parable is (and obviously he does not, or he wouldn't have quoted it) than I won't waste my time on him.

Again, this was talking about the Muslims and it is always ALWAYS turned into an attack against Christians without any merit at all.

1 Corinthians 14:38 (NKJV)But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.

Matthew 7:6 (NIV)Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.

The Luke 19:27 looks to me like a legit argument against your quotes of Qu'Ran..

Okay, the quote of Luke can be interpreted not as cruel as it sounds. But then it gets us to the point of how we want to interpret it. Something tells me Qu'Ran isn't necessarily that evil of a book as one could think reading the quotes above.

I know no much about either book. However one dying for the sake of one of the books(suicide bombers, crusaders) also don't necessarily know much about them either..

Which gets us precisely to the point of interpretation, and ti the fact we see what we want to see.